The Netherlands is one of the countries where the Englishization of higher
education is most evident. The percentage of bachelor’s and master’s
programmes at Dutch universities through the medium of English is among
the highest in Europe. This chapter addresses the concern and public
controversy generated by the preponderance of English. It illustrates how
language policy encapsulates the changes in Dutch universities and the
impacts these have on stakeholders and compares these with a study of
students’ perceptions of EMI. The analysis contends that Englishization
can only be understood in the light of the impact of neoliberalism on
academia, highlighting the incongruity between the critical voices in
the public controversy and the discourse of university administrators.
The worldwide introduction of English as a medium of instruction (EMI) programmes has stimulated numerous reflections within and outside academia. These reflections find their expression in both scholarly studies into EMI and public debates about its impact. In this article we argue that one can distinguish two types of reflections about EMI. The first type focuses on improving EMI. The second type focuses on the legitimation of EMI, that is whether EMI programmes are justified in view of their assumptions and consequences. We investigate the genesis and the differences between two separate discourses that express the different types of reflections. We unfold a history that shows that roughly three phases can be distinguished in the development of EMI: the incubation of EMI, its consolidation and its politicisation. We argue that the heuristic value of the two types of reflection is that they are conducive to comprehending this development of EMI and look at it with critical eyes. In addition, we suggest that politicised issues like the impact of Englishization on the cultural identity, language hierarchies, top-down implementations of language policies and the inequalities regarding the access to EMI programmes might be fruitfully addressed in terms of linguistic justice and democracy. By distinguishing two types of reflection, blind spots in EMI research can be revealed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.